Educational Psychology Review

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 93–112 | Cite as

Prospective Educational Applications of Mental Simulation: A Meta-review

  • Josephine P. van Meer
  • Nicolet C. M. Theunissen
Review Article

Abstract

This paper focuses on the potential of mental simulation (mentally rehearsing an action to enhance performance) as a useful contemporary educational method. By means of a meta-review, it is examined which conditions impede or facilitate the effectiveness of mental simulation (MS). A computer search was conducted using Ovid PsycINFO. Reviews, meta-reviews, or meta-analyses published between 1806 and 2006 were included. The current paper presents the results of ten publications in which about 630 studies on mental simulation or mental practice are reviewed. According to the analyses, conditions that influence the effect of MS are the type of skill practiced, personal factors, time per trial, amount of trials, and instructional procedures. Based on these insights, it is reflected upon in which areas MS would be functional with regard to contemporary educational demands, such as for emotional, behavioral, and (other) complex cognitive tasks.

Keywords

Educational method Mental simulation Mental practice Visualization Imagery 

References

  1. American Psychological Association (1996). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (4th ed.). Washington, DC, USA: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  2. Beck, A. T. (1976). Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders. New York, USA: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
  3. Billings, D. M. (2005). From teaching to learning in a mobile, wireless world. The Journal of Nursing Education, 44, 343.Google Scholar
  4. Brandenburg, D. C., & Ellinger, A. D. (2003). Learning expectations and potential implications for human resource development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 5, 308–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buckley, K. E., & Anderson, C. A. (2006). A theoretical model of the effects and consequences of playing video games. In P. Vorderer & J. Bryant (Eds.), Playing video games: Motives, responses and consequences. New Jersey: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  6. Cooper, G., Tindall-Ford, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2001). Learning by imagining. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 7, 68–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Driskell, J. E., Copper, C., & Moran, A. (1994). Does mental practice enhance performance? The Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 481–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Druckman, D. (2004). Be all that you can be: Enhancing human performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 2234–2260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Feltz, D. L., & Landers, D. M. (1983). The effects of mental practice on motor skill learning and performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Sport Psychology, 5, 25–57.Google Scholar
  10. Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York, USA: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  11. Ginns, P. (2003). Imagining instructions: a role for mental practice in higher education. Presentation, Herdsa Annual Conference, Christchurch.Google Scholar
  12. Ginns, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). When imagining information is effective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 229–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Greig, A. (2007). A framework for the delivery of cognitive behaviour therapy in the educational psychology context. Educational and Child Psychology, 24, 19–35.Google Scholar
  14. Grouios, G. (1992). Mental practice: A review. Journal of Sport Behavior, 15, 42–59.Google Scholar
  15. Guillot, A., & Collet, C. (2005). Duration of mentally simulated movement: A review. Journal of Motor Behavior, 37, 10–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hinshaw, K. E. (1991). The effects of mental practice on motor skill performance: Critical evaluation and meta-analysis. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 11, 3–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Keegan, D. (2002). The future of learning: From e-learning to m-learning (Rep. No. ZIFF-Papiere 119). Hage: FernUniversität.Google Scholar
  18. Kester, L., Kirschner, P. A., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Baumer, A. (2001). Just-in-time information presentation and the acquisition of complex cognitive skills. Computers in Human Behavior, 17, 373–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Landau, J. D., Leynes, P. A., & Libkuman, T. M. (2001). Mental simulation increases physical performance estimates but not physical performance. Journal of Mental Imagery, 25, 93–106.Google Scholar
  20. Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2005). Interactions among the imagination, expertise reversal, and element interactivity effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 11, 266–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2008). The imagination effect increases with an increased intrinsic cognitive load. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 273–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lieberman, D. A. (2006). What can we learn from playing interactive games? In P. Vorderer & J. Bryant (Eds.), Playing video games: Motives, responses and consequences. New Jersey: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  23. Murphy, S. M. (1990). Models of imagery in sport psychology: A review. Journal of Mental Imagery, 14, 153–172.Google Scholar
  24. Murphy, S. M. (1994). Imagery interventions in sport. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 26, 486–494.Google Scholar
  25. O’Keeffe, I., Brady, A., Conlan, O., & Wade, V. (2006). Just-in-time generation of pedagogically sound, context sensitive learning experiences. International Journal on E-Learning, 5, 113–127.Google Scholar
  26. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  27. Richardson, A. (1967). Mental practice: A review and discussion: II. Research Quarterly, 38, 263–273.Google Scholar
  28. Ritterfeld, U., & Weber, R. (2006). Video games for entertainment and education. In P. Vorderer & J. Bryant (Eds.), Playing video games: Motives, responses and consequences. New Jersey: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  29. Rosenberg, M. J. (2000). E-learning, strategies for delivering knowledge in the digital age. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  30. Rosnow, R. L., & Rosenthal, R. (1996). Computing contrasts, effect sizes, and counternulls on other people’s published data: General procedures for research consumers. Psychological Methods, 1, 331–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stubbé, H. E., & Theunissen, N. C. M. (2008). Self-directed adult learning in a ubiquitous learning environment: A meta-review. Proceedings, 4th EduMedia Conference 2008 Special track, Technology Support for Self-Organised Learners (TSSOL08), Salzburg, Austria, 2–3 June.Google Scholar
  32. Suinn, R. M. (1985). Imagery rehearsal applications to performance enhancement. Behavior Therapist, 8, 155–159.Google Scholar
  33. Suinn, R. M. (1997). Mental practice in sport psychology: Where have we been, where do we go? Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 4, 189–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Taylor, S. E., Pham, L. B., Rivkin, I. D., & Armor, D. A. (1998). Harnessing the imagination: Mental stimulation, self-regulation, and coping. The American Psychologist, 53, 429–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Theunissen, N. C. M., De Ridder, D. T. D., Bensing, J. M., & Rutten, G. E. H. M. (2003). Manipulation of patient–provider interaction: Discussing illness representations or action plans concerning adherence. Patient Education and Counseling, 51, 239–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ting, R. Y. L. (2005). Mobile learning: Current trend and future challenges. Proceedings, IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), pp. 603–607.Google Scholar
  37. Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17, 147–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Clark, R., & de Croock, M. B. M. (2002). Blueprints for complex learning: The 4C/ID-Model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50, 39–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ward, M., & Sweller, J. (1990). Structuring effective worked examples. Cognition and Instruction, 7, 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wulf, G., & Shea, C. H. (2002). Principles derived from the study of simple skills do not generalize to complex skill learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 185–211.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Josephine P. van Meer
    • 1
  • Nicolet C. M. Theunissen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Training and InstructionTNO Human FactorsSoesterbergThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations